The Trump Administration tells Harvard it can no longer enroll foreign students

Pinker’s record is quite open to explore. Perhaps he hasn’t made much of an impact on Harvard, but he cites several recent reforms at Harvard, including how Harvard “has adopted a policy of institutional neutrality, no longer pontificating on issues that don’t affect its own functioning. It has drawn lines on disruptive protests, and will create centralized enforcement so that violators can’t jury-shop or count on faculty nullification. The Faculty of Arts and Sciences has eliminated the “diversity statements” that vetted job applicants for their willingness to write woke-o-babble, and its dean has called on program directors to report on their units’ viewpoint diversity.”

As for the second point about only Harvard being able to fix Harvard, I think is an incorrect reading. In fact Pinker states basically the opposite, “If the federal government doesn’t force Harvard to reform, what will? There are legitimate concerns that universities have weak mechanisms for feedback and self-improvement. A business in the red can fire its chief executive; a losing team can replace its coach. But most academic fields don’t have objective metrics of success and rely instead on peer review, which can amount to professors conferring prestige on one another in self-affirming cliques.” He advocates for other solutions including giving a larger mandate to outside visiting committees and greater transparency of the Harvard Corporation.

I think his main thesis is that the blunt instrument of federal takeover of such a complex institution is likely to lead to more harm than good. Picture the Biden administration mandating specific changes in the Catholic Church to right its failings. I am sure the idea sounds good to some liberals, but a disaster it would be. So too here.

To your final point, I don’t take the last line as a description of the past but instead a warning about the future, essentially saying that true damage to US academia would have larger ramifications than many appreciate.

 

Literally my point.
Maga is taking a literal liberal position here.

 

From Charleston to this. The needle moves.

It seems the propaganda from the talking heads just want to keep everyone angry on largely fabricated issues. The tail wagging the dog.

Don’t support the Donald and you are a liberal commie. SMDH. Maybe it’s just that Trump is a douche vs anyone really liked Biden, Pelosi or Chucky doll.

I was always a fiscal republican. I don’t care for the religious right GOP. I’ve seen enough bad religious actors in my life to want any commingling with politics. Even though I know it is inevitable.

What was the saying, propaganda is the art of allowing people to believe they are thinking for themselves? It is possible that both Universities and politics have jumped the shark. Apologies to Butters

ymmv

Go Gators.

 

Not a good time to be a conservative…

 

Judge blocks Trump push to ban Harvard international students

 

God bless Obama

 

Just because you don’t like what maga is doing doesn’t make it a progressive feature. This is an authoritarian move that is pinned to the right as far as you can go.

 

I assume there are a ton of international faculty at Harvard, including top on their field professors. I bet this goes over really well with them.

 

Obama basically gave birth to Donald Trump.

 

You missed the target but hit the tree.

 

When has the liberal position ever been to do anything like this?

 

Liberals (on this board) have argued that federal money gives government the right to interject government authority in private schools. Some here calling for money to be cut off to students who attend those schools if the school doesnt toe the line.

Some have insisted the government can even force speech on businesses regardless of federal money.

It is a liberal mindset at its core. At least to those on the far left.

So it pisses me off to see conservatives scream for the same thing that we SHOULD be against.

 

People on this board have stated vouchers or financial aid for students in private schools should be contingent on what those schools teach. (It has come up in LGBT/Religious schools conversation).

It has also come up in conversations about tax exempt status for churches. (Some calling for the revocation of the status to churches that wont hire LGBT staff etc.)

 

My take. The govt loans aren’t really govt money. (Not sure how tuition grants work or if they are still around) Although the system is a problem. Grants and other mechanisms, yes, but they each have their own set of restrictions and guidelines and were contracts signed between the Govt and the grantee.

Vouchers for private school shouldn’t exist in my perfect world.

Vouchers and loans are very much apples and taters.

 

Pretty huge gap between “some have said” and “the liberal position.”

 

So .... what is the logical basis for determining an equivalency between (1) the federal government directly funding private schools with taxpayer US$s .... and (2) the issuance of F-1 and M-1 visas to foreign students? There is quite a difference between those two.

 

Should edit the thread title for accuracy

Judge Tells Trump He Cannot Tell Harvard Who They Can Enroll

 

imagine KSA and Qatar offering greater academic freedom to entice world class professors than the USA. They are trying desperately, and succeeding, at building universities that will rival ours.

And then all those billion dollar unicorn companies started or co founded by foreign students can start there

and we can make i phones

from designing iphones to screwing them together, sending america backwards at warp speed

 

future queen of belgium..definitely a radical leftist that needs to be kicked out

Future queen caught up in Trump's foreign student ban at Harvard | Irish Star